Physiology versus evidence-based guidance for critical care practice

8Citations
Citations of this article
44Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Evidence based medicine is an attempt to optimize the medical decision process through methods primarily based on evidence coming from meta-analyses, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials ("evidence-based medicine"), rather than on "clinical judgment" alone. The randomized trials are the cornerstones of this process. However, the randomized trials are just a method to prove or disprove a given hypothesis, which, in turn, derives from a general observation of the reality (premises or theories). In this paper we will examine some of the most recent randomized trials performed in Intensive Care, analyzing their premises, hypothesis and outcome. It is quite evident that when the premises are wrong or too vague the unavoidable consequences will be a negative outcome. We should pay when designing the trial an equal attention in defining premises and hypothesis that we pay for the trial conduction.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gattinoni, L., Carlesso, E., & Santini, A. (2015, December 18). Physiology versus evidence-based guidance for critical care practice. Critical Care. BioMed Central Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1186/cc14725

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free